Jump to content
The Official RONR Q & A Forums

Greg Goodwiller

Members
  • Content Count

    303
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Greg Goodwiller

  • Rank
    Professional Registered Parliamentarian
  • Birthday 10/29/1960

Profile Information

  • Location:
    Oxford, MS

Recent Profile Visitors

1,367 profile views
  1. Are you perhaps watching the House Judiciary Committee hearing this morning, where that just happened? The obvious point of the "maneuver," as you call it, was to keep from debating the appeal. RONR makes it clear that such is not the purpose of the motion; however, RONR isn't the parliamentary authority for the House of Representatives, and regardless, since the Chair accepted the motion and no one objected, it stood.
  2. In RONR, a “session” Of an assembly may be composed of a single meeting, or a series of meetings. If, for example, an annual convention of an organization meets for a week, each day may have multiple meetings, so that the entire session might be composed of maybe a dozen meetings. In that case, it would not be inappropriate to say that the assembly was “in session,” even if a meeting was not currently being held. I suggest you read more of what the bylaws say about this committee, and it’s meetings/sessions.
  3. I disagree - on the basis of RONR pg. 440, ll. 14-17, which states, "The assembly is free, however, to elect the same person to another office on a subsequent ballot, unless the bylaws prohibit a person from holding both offices simultaneously." That's not specifically about a chair and a secretary, but in writing bylaws for organizations, I always try to be clear about which offices may and may not be combined.
  4. However, also in accordance with RONR, the "clerk" announcing the vote count is not the same thing as the presiding officer declaring the result. If instead of declaring the result the mayor instead "tabled" the motion - and no one objected by rising to a point of order - then that is the action that stands, and it is too late to do so at the next meeting.
  5. The point is that the RONR standard for most motions is a majority of those "present and voting;" therefore, if anyone chooses not to vote, their abstention from voting doesn't affect the outcome..
  6. In addition to what my colleague has said, I think a resolution composed and signed by multiple members can be submitted, the adoption of which is then moved by one member and seconded by another.
  7. I must disagree with my colleague about email meetings. I personally think they should only be used for unanimous consent motions - authorized in a clearly defined article in the bylaws. In reality, many states require it for non-profit corporations. I work quite a bit with electronic meetings, including the development of rules for such meetings, and I also recommend that the rules adopted for electronic meetings cover what to do with the technology fails to facilitate the meeting whatever the reason. That's why special rules of order exist in the first place.
  8. Agreeing with "Guest Who's . . .", With that motion defeated, a different motion would then be in order. It could be "that the application be accepted," but under the circumstances, it would probably be more helpful to move that it be either postponed indefinitely (which kills it, if adopted) or that it be referred (which allows the committee to which it is referred to figure out how to bring back a motion that a majority will support).
  9. Here is the relevant passage from RONR: "Action on the Financial Report. No action of acceptance by the assembly is required—or proper—on a financial report of the treasurer unless it is of sufficient importance, as an annual report, to be referred to auditors. In the latter case it is the auditors' report which the assembly accepts." (RONR pg. 479, ll. 5-9). The point is that "accepting" an unaudited financial report can have the effect of accepting something as valid that an expert has not so verified. We aren't attorneys, here, but our attorneys tell us that is a bad thing with respect to liability. After hearing or reviewing financial reports, I say something like, "are there any questions? Hearing none, thank you, madam treasurer, the report is filed for audit."
  10. If a member believes that a motion is out of order but the presiding officer does not rule it out of order, the member can immediately raise a point of order, and state his or her reasons. If the presiding officer rules the point "not well taken" and continues to move forward with the motion, the member can immediately appeal from the ruling of the chair, in which case the full assembly would decide the question, which would be "shall the ruling of the chair be sustained?" An appeal, unlike the underlying Point of Order, requires a second, is debatable (although with special rules), and requires a majority vote in the negative to overturn the chair's ruling. Additional rules and forms for these two motions are covered in RONR beginning on page 247.
  11. "Let's eat Grandma!" "Let's eat, Grandma!" Yes, punctuation matters.
  12. In that case, no. "Past President" is only an office if it is so designated in your bylaws.
  13. I just communicated with my colleague in Holston who has assured me that it has now been removed.
  14. I'm not sure what you think was potentially not "legitimate." There are some technical issues. But since the matter, whatever it was, was adopted by vote of the committee - and no one appears to have raised any points of order or contested the vote - then it stands as an action of the committee.
  15. That would be a matter of what your own rules dictate. Nothing in Robert's Rules either requires or prohibits the requirement of completing an application for an office.
×
×
  • Create New...